Democrats` Feuds Dim Unity Hopes

January 29, 1985|By Jon Margolis, Chicago Tribune.

WASHINGTON — The contest for Democratic national chairman got nasty Monday, with the candidates and their supporters accusing each other of a variety of offenses, including sexism and strong-arm tactics.

The accuracy of these allegations was all but impossible to determine because most of them were based on one person saying what a second person had said to yet a third person.

But whether Democrats really are saying such nasty things about each other matters little as long as they think they are saying such nasty things about each other, which they do, and which is hardly conducive to the party unity they so sorely need.

``Why do we always do this to ourselves?`` one Democratic political strategist asked. ``This is going to be awful.``

To make matters worse for the party, the squabbling started with one of the leading contenders for the chairmanship claiming that another was too closely associated with Sen. Edward Kennedy (D., Mass.) and with the AFL-CIO. ``If you have 15 years association with Ted Kennedy and the balance (of support) comes from (labor`s) 40 votes, where are we coming from?`` asked Nancy Pelosi. ``Is that going into the future?``

Pelosi was talking about Paul Kirk, who is the leading candidate in the race, which will be decided Friday by the 378-member Democratic National Committee. Kirk, once a close aide to Kennedy, has the backing of the AFL-CIO, if not its official endorsement.

Beset by increasing criticism about domination by ``special interests``

and decreasing support from moderates and Southerners, the Democrats need more publicity about their attachment to labor and about Kennedy`s influence about as much as Africa needs more drought.

Kirk has insisted that under his chairmanship the national committee would favor no presidential candidate, no matter who runs. Almost everybody beleives him, but his Kennedy connection still bothered Democrats in the South, where Kennedy is unpopular, to the point where they went out and recruited another candidate for chairman: former Gov. Terry Sanford of North Carolina.

``I don`t think the political office of the AFL-CIO is the place where the (chairmanship) decision should be made,`` Pelosi said. She also claimed that labor`s political operatives were playing dirty pool, using sexist arguments against her candidacy.

``They`ve told people I was an airhead,`` Pelosi said. While acknowledging that men, too, could be airheads, Pelosi said she believed the insult was an effort to portray her as a flighty woman.

An experienced political operative who once was California state chairman, Pelosi is no airhead. In fact, her allegations appeared to be part of a deliberate effort to shake loose some of Kirk`s support by portraying him as a candidate who is beholden to special interests and to discredited ideas and whose supporters are brow-beating committee members.

There is little doubt that despite its official neutrality, the AFL-CIO is rounding up support for Kirk. On the other hand, charges were flying Monday about behind-the-scenes strong-arming on behalf of the other contenders.

One report held that Southern state chairmen backing Sanford had threatened political retaliation of some kind against any Southern member of the Democratic National Committee who did not vote for the former governor.

According to everyone`s count, Kirk is leading the race. His own count, one of his supporters said, gives him 196 votes, more than the 182 needed to win if all 363 votes are cast. (Members from Guam, American Samoa and other territories have one-fourth of a vote each).

But neutral vote-counters give Kirk only about 145 votes, making his victory less than certain. Should he falter, the Democrats could turn to Pelosi or Sanford, or to the fourth candidate, Robert Keefe, who is clinging to the hope that in a deadlock his party would turn to him.